tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN February 12, 2020 11:59am-3:08pm EST
this misconduct. we are and the r.n.c. is at it again. dr. dillingham, are you familiar this r.n.c. mailer? mr. dillingham: i have heard generally about the problem. we seen it?have mr. dillingham: no. sent it to we have the bureau. will you commit to reviewing it? will be glad : we to review it. porter: will you commit to reviewing it? mr. dillingham: i certainly will. s. porter: have you asked the desistto cease and de -- to use official 2020 census -- hearing leaving this on the u.s. census to bring you live coverage of the u.s. house. hearing continues live on our website c-span.org. the house about to gavel in at oon eastern for legislative work. members will debate new ilderness and scenic river protections for federal land in california, colorado, and
washington state. related to the bill will begin at about 3:30 eastern today. u.s. house e of the is here on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, dr. lance watson, st. paul's baptist church,, richmond, virginia. the chaplain: let us pray, we gather today in this house of representatives and the people's house to acknowledge that you alone are sovereign. thank you we share in a nation where life, liberty and happiness, are rights which we hold as self-evident. we praise you for the responsibility we have to do justice, love, mercy and walk humbly with you. give us the power to find need
to meet them, find problems and solve them, find hurts and heal them. for every elected official, we ask the blessings of civility, truth, wisdom and grace. amid diversity, embrace unity. open our hearts, courage and imagination that we might envision a better tomorrow where your purpose will prevail on earth as it is in heaven. let your grace and favor rest upon us in the matchless, marvelous, majestic name that is above every name. we pray and give thanks. amen. the speaker pro tempore: chair and announces to the house her approval thereof urnal the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley.
mr. quigley: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman from virginia, ms. spanburger, is recognized for one minute. spano: -- to spanberger: i'd like thank reverend lance watson for his thoughtful opening prayer morning. his accomplishments as a spiritual and community leader are an example to all of us. years, reverend watson has served as the senior pastor of st. paul's baptist richmond area. dr. watson has been honored as an outstanding community leader, outstanding contributor to education, and minister of the multiple organizations and he leads a congregation of nearly 12,000 people. hile reverend watson has
focused on the spiritual development of the community through his ministry, he has and supported the social economic development of the community in a variety of ways. st. paul'seadership, baptist church has initiated a bold plan to build housing, a and urban -- an urban farm and community garden to improve community. virginia i thank reverend watson, his wife, firz lady rose -- first rose watson, an accomplished singer, and the st. e watson family to the paul's community and central irginia and i thank reverend watson for offering the opening prayer. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the entleman from of illinois seek recognition? mr. quigley: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to my remarks.xtend the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. you.uigley: thank mr. speaker, during his intel ny before the committee, lieutenant colonel
alexander vindman had a message worry, i ther, do not will be fine for telling the truth. war hero who has earned far better than the treatment he received from the administration week. but this behavior should not surprise us. it's part of a pattern. et us remember the campaign waged against ambassador marie year.vitch last an exemplary public servant who deserved our gratitude. administration shamelessly attacked her and fired her to further the president's personal agenda. with the ambassador when she wrote, i remain optimistic about the future. the events of the past year, while deeply disturbing, show even though our institutions and fellow citizens are being challenged in ways that few of will endurected, we and we will persist. indeed. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? i ask unanimous
consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is minute.zed for one ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. this past saturday, the boy celebrated itsca 110th anniversary. million active participants, it is one of the largest youth organizations in the country. its founding in 1910, the boy scouts of america have lives of young women by teaching them character, evelopment, self-reliance, and principles of responsible citizenship. hickory trict, the council of the boy scouts of america, originally a single in p organized winston-salem, serves over eight counties and has almost 5,000 members. 2018, they provided more than local service hours at charities and organizations. i congratulate the boy scouts of 110 years of service, and i'm confident that they will positively impact
communities across our country for many years to come. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the entleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. easy to feel disheartened in washington. to nt to take a moment change that narrative and thank my district for their profound display of community. office is leading a valentine's for vets drive, do vets.alentines for mr. morrelle: thanking our service members for their to our country has been heartening. want to give a special shoutout to students who have dropped off. walsh's fourth grade. and childcare daycare.
the joseph c. wilson foundation rochester. the mary children's center. and my granddaughter harper's patty hill elementary school in greecement i am so proud of our nation's vets and for coming nity together in such a touching display of support for them. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the peaker pro tempore: gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. > mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize and congratulate the 2019 grandview high school zeeb are as' football -- zebras football team. footballs, high school isn't just a sport. it's a way of life. each week in the fall we gather lights and night cheer our team onto victory. he young men and women and coaches on our team spend countless hours running drills, watching film, and getting ready history. moment in mr. williams: during the 2019 season, grandview's dedication defeated the ey
at at&t cardinals 42-35 stadium for their second straight title. 25th alf of the congressional district, i congratulate the fighting zebras n their victory and wish them the best in the future. in god we trust, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the entlewoman from virginia seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. to call on my colleagues to join me in ddressing the need for preventative health care for our military's aviators. i'm 20-year navy veteran, concerned by the alarming antidotal evidence provided by and navy pilots of increased incidents of cancer due to cockpit exposure. e need to make sure that our service members have the best care as possible. that's why i'm introducing a study act. a bipartisan bill will help the
department of defense and the department of veterans affairs the causes of cancer among our military pilots so we can assure that our aviators the preventive cancer screenings they have earned. luria: by studying this, professionals at d.o.d. and the v.a. can determine the appropriate age to screen pilots or cancer so they can live longer and healthier lives. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute nd to revise and extend my remarks as necessary. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. > mr. speaker, i rise today to honor an outstanding member of my staff who has been selected to he trump administration be the oversight counsel for the department of homeland security, veech.rtney courtney graduated from the and rsity of north florida the florida college of law in 2015. he's been with my office for
three years as legislative assistant and as general counsel. been an expert on veterans affairs, health care, and tax she has always served with both grit and grace. of her love ause for the law and for policy, she lso served on the campaigns of senator marco rubio and governor ron desantis. n 2018, i had the honor of swearing her in to the district f columbia bar in this very building. courtney was so very proud of -- of ally, we are so proud you have accomplished in serving the people of the second ongressional district of florida. i wish to wish her luck in her endeavors. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is minute.zed for one >> mr. speaker, today i rise to recognize the accomplishments of mid shipman third
cario who anthony died suddenly. but was just 21 years old had already distinguished himself as a hardworking, woman.tic from flower mound, texas, where football tain of his and wrestling team. kind, generous, fun loving, duke familyd the lives of his as well as the classmates at the naval academy. remember duke. i e was my son's roommate at annapolis. our country lost a dedicated and duke never accolades. claim he was doing his dudy just like -- duty just like his twin dillon and younger shipmen.ake, also mid a strong testament. though he left us at a young learn from his
example. my thoughts and prayers are with his family. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the yields back. for what purpose does the entleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, february is career and technical month, and today to bring attention to the importance of technical skills to our economy and our system.n mr. comer: teaching the students the skills they need to modern economy should be our top education priority. on a onomy depends workforce that is capable of jobs in wielding, electrical work, others. while the current state of our conomy is strong, we must strive to remain competitive with the rest of the world. is a top priority of mine. that's why i was happy to see ply -- t trump prioritize technical education proposed $9t with a
million increase in investment. i am proud of our technology first in kentucky's congressional district who are working to equip our students with crucial vocational skills. i'm hopeful congress with work to provide them with the support necessary to build on their creating a 21st century workforce. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize the remarkable life of peggy daniel. peggy was a true friend, not only to me, but really to met.one she a graduate of college and earning her postgraduate degree memphis, niversity of peggy loved watching and rooting for her memphis tigers and she knew her roots were in west tennessee. she with a married -- she was married to a great man. active leader of
the girl scouts, cub scouts deeply involved in the political process. she and jimmy worked hard to in d the republican party west tennessee. mr. kustoff: frankly, there are of that e i can think are as patriotic as peggy. eggy was a true american patriot. she loved wearing her red, white, and blue. melanie, ughter, summed it up best when she said eggy williams daniel entered this world with a star-spangled bang and with all her wit and enthusiastic energy throughout her colorful life. leaves behind behind her three children, my friends. miss peggy deeply but know that her spirit lives on and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker -- mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to rshgs my remarks. -- revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, last month the .p.a. announced the new navigatal waters rule that would replace the disastrous waters of the u.s. proposal. this role support which will finally restore the limits of the clean water act farmers, ranchers, and landowners through clarity on law is s -- when the reached. to help bring more certainty to arm producers, i reebtly introduce -- i recently introduced with my friend, bridging erson, the responsible agriculture conservation efforts act of addresses wetland determinations under the clean water act. nder current law, the army corps of engineers are tasked with such determinations on farm lands. owever, many farmers experienced confusion and undo burdens for decades due to the discord nation between the making such determinations. this bill will foster cohesion clarifythe agencies and what defines normal farming practices. farming ng modern
practices and clearly defining converted croplands will bring overdue certainty to this process. i support this legislation which nation's for our farmers and ranchers. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does gentleman seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: the january jobs report is with gains is terrific. over 225,000 jobs were created and wages increased. ew job creation has achieved a 50-year high. i am grateful that president trump and republican policies have put the american economy into high gear, reducing taxes and regulations. this first jobs report shows america's economy will continue to thrive in 2020, thanks to president trump. following an acquittal after the
impeachment hoax, following the providing a peace plan for israel, inspiring the state of the union address and providing trade agreements with united states, canada and mexico, this jobs report rounds out another week of winning for president trump. all americans suffer the lowest levels of unemployment. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. harris: no wonder americans elected a president who struck a cord with businesses and with the fake news media. this week after the president released his budget plan, his opponents here on the floor and in the media are spouting fake news, falsely claiming that the
president's budget cuts social security, medicare and medicaid. just like seeing the impeachment phone call transcipts for themselves that exposed the impeachment as a hoax, every american should look at the budget and see how fake the claims are that social security, medicaid and medicare are cut. they would see a budget that doesn't touch those benefits and see a medicaid budget that not only isn't cut but increases 3.1% a yearment by controlling other spending, the president's budget actually sets on a path to finally balancing our budget. that's much better than the last administration, which in eight years never ever submitted a budget that would balance. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
>> i recognize my friend mr. randy routeon for 30 years of dedicated service a mental health care provider. randy's leadership helped thousands of families and individuals throughout our community gain access to life-changing mental health care. his dedication was illustrated by his role on many boards, committees, task forces and clubs throughout our community. i proudly worked with him during my time in the state legislature of ensuring that everyone in colin county had a chance to receive high-quality mental health care. he is looking forward to spending time with his wife, six children and six grandchildren. i ask my colleagues in the u.s. house of representatives of representatives to join me in thanking randy for his career of serving those around him.
mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamalfa: the senate judiciary committee had a hearing on the born alive abortion survivors protection act. in the house, democrat leadership continues to block the nearly 80 times my republican colleagues have tried to consider the legislation on this floor let alone even holding a hearing. i'm worried about most americans assume doctors and nurses would help a baby that is somehow survives an abortion. you would be surprised and sad to know that is not always the case. in 2002, an infant who survives an abortion is indeed a person. so why is there no legal protection for the newborn babies who have run the gauntlet and who survived, been born alive after a failed abortion
attempt? it's way past the time to hold them accountable to ensure best possible care for any newborn baby despite what the governor of virginia might say. thank you to my colleagues with steve scalise and ann wagner for their great work on this issue. time the house passes this legislation to protect the sanctity of newborn innocent life. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable, the speaker, house of representatives, madam, pursuant to the permission granted in 2-h of rule 2 of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on february 12, 2020 at 9:36 a.m. that the senate agreed to without amendment house joint resolution 80. signed sincerely, robert f.
reed, deputy clerk. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend tear remarks and insert extraneous material on h.r. 2546. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
so ordered. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 844 and rule 18, the chair declares in the committee of the whole on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 2546. the chair appoints the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, to preside over the ommittee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 2546, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to designate certain lands in the state of colorado as components of the
national wilderness preservation system and for other purposes. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the first time. germ debate shall be confined to the bill and amendments specified in the house section house resolution 844 and not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking member. the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. degette and the gentleman from idaho, mr. fulcher each will control 30 minutes. ms. degette: i yield myself knife minutes. the chair: the gentlewoman is ecognized. ms. degette: i'm pleased today to rise in support of h.r. 2546, the protecting america's wilderness act.
as a fourth generation resident of colorado, i know how important the public lands are to americans across the west. wilderness areas provide us a glimpse of what our world looked like before it was taken over by man. it was one of the most pristine areas on the planet. for many of us, the access we have to these lands are a large part of why we are so proud to call our western states home and so many others come to visit us each year. while we may be the stewards of some of these lands our nation's public lands belong to everyone and we as members of congress should be doing everything we can to protect them. the bill before us would permanently protect nearly 1.4 million acres of land across three states and one of the ladgest wilderness protection packages congress has considered in over a decade and largest that congress has considered for colorado in a generation.
the areas includes some of the unique and irreplaceable landscapes from the winding canyons of colorado, to the native grasslands of california, to the forests of washington state. the designations in this bill will do more than protect the land itself but protect the air we breathe and water we drink and help protect wildlife in our recreation areas. they will provide a boost to the nearby economy and help grow our nation's multibillion dollar industry that directly supports thousands of jobs across the u.s. perhaps most importantly, in preserving these lands, the bill will do what we need to do to further fulfill the house's commitment to stake steps to combat the climate crisis. preserving our public lands is one of the best short-term solutions that we as a nation can take to respond to this
crisis. experts agree, we must strive to protect 30% of our public lands by 2030 to protect our planet. the protecting wilderness act combines six bills each introduced by a different member of congress, title i of the bill consists of my legislation, the colorado wilderness act, which will permanently protect more than 600,000 acres of wilderness in over 32 unique areas. for more than 20 years now, i have been working closely with a group of citizens from my state as well as countless local residents and community leaders to craft and recraft the legislation we have before us today. i personally had been to most of the areas in my bill by foot, by horse and my raft to experience the areas for myself. i have met with land owners and ranchers across my state to get their feedback and when necessary to adjust the bill to address their concerns. it includes areas like the
and ic grand hogback little book. areas like the stunning red cliffs of the do lores canyon and brown canyon. hears like the desert slopes of cross canyon and the highest peaks of the san juan mountains places untouched by man. these are some of the more than 1.3 million acres of wilderness this bill will proper text and area 1,000 river miles and will expand or designate new recreation areas, nationalmon youments, scenic and special management areas, restoration areas and trails. i can't thank my colleagues enough for the work they have done to make this bill a reality, especially representatives huffman, chu, schiff and kilmer. each one of them is going to have more to say about their
individual titles in bill, but before i yield to them, i want to address my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. i recognize that we have ideological differences about about protecting our public lands. but i want to encourage them to consider the importance of protecting not only our nation's environment, but our economy and way of life. i urge them to consider our tireless and ongoing efforts to ensure that this mr. williams: not just protect public lands but make a real boost to our economy. wilderness is about providing our fellow americans with wild places to escape and if we don't take steps right now to protect those magical places, then one day they will no longer exist. a famous conservation activity once said, what a country chooses to say about itself. these areas are without a doubt
deserving of the highest protections we can give them and ssing them onto the next generation and it has been one of our top priorities. i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from idaho is recognized. . . >> regardless what the house does, this bill is not going to signed into law, and i find toonly fair as to explain as why -- this package of bills is on an ideological thought process that's always failed and to fail.to continue fail lcher: it will because this will add million new 1.5 wilderness acres.
1,100 eady have about million. it will add 1.5 million. the ll fail because sponsors think they're protecting this land. is true. the opposite unmanaged l because land equals fuel load. load equals wildfire. to the rman, according insurance information institute, over the last five years, an average of 7.86 million has burned in the united states. according to the congressional service, about 78% of on public land. ilderness, the wilderness designation is the most is.erable public land there more wilderness equals more
fire. more carbon.als aboutere in the region of 40 tons per acre when a wildfire burns. and it gets worse. a forest burns, that's god's best tool for absorbing gases and that's destroyed. that's like taking out your lungs. chairman, i can't count the number of times that i've heard change since te i've taken office. the same people sponsoring these bills, the climb change change -- the climate fighters, are fighting to increase the major causes of that. so, yes, this bill will get stalled. it may pass the house but it fail. all this land happens to be in west -- colorado, washington, california. you're from connecticut or new york or some for eastern state to vote
1.5 million acre wilderness designation somewhere in the western u.s. and then not to have explain to constituents the real impact. you go home and say, hey, i expanded wilderness. land.d all this well, guess what, it does impact and here's uents why. creation of wilderness, scenic the s and monuments is creation of another federal dependent. and fire is on these lands. those who live in those states or surrounded states, we're those to govern in states. and under these designations, you just can't touch it until and then you have to fight it. helping tes that are ake this decision, your constituents are subsidizing us.
and the senate president know that's not right. the senate and president know 47 states in this case decide what happens in right.s not so they will stall this bill. but i'm simply hoping to raise in this situation in a way that at least makes people think. to not naive what's going happen with the bill. his package designates about 100,000 acres of national monument expansion. argument. the same ditto. it has 833 miles of wild scenic rivers. home a point, please know this. sometimes our fish needs some help. this designation will prevent that. ometimes our fires create a devastating silk flow in our waterways. that we need some human help but won't be able to do it under these circumstances. assive new management burdens on our federal government,
already $2.3 trillion in debt, our federal government is in over its head already. what afford to manage we've already got so we don't. this is the wrong bill for the west. it's the wrong bill for idaho. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: does the gentleman reserve? reserve.er: i the chair: the gentleman from idaho reserves. the gentlelady from colorado may proceed. ms. degette: i yield to the gentleman from california, mr. huffman, four minutes. the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. huffman: i thank the gentlelady for the time and i for her k her leadership, not just on her own bill, but for leading the charge on a package of bills that includes my northwest california ilderness recreation and working forest act as title 2. he lands in my district that are included in this legislation represent some of the most ecosystems and exciting outdoor opportunities
in california. old growth trees that are so critical for carbon sequestration to rivers that habitat and unparalleled fishing and boating to mountain trails that offer hiking, biking, and other unique back country experiences. outdoors, e in the experiencing these wild places a healthy ing to environment is the way of life second district in california. my constituents and visitors from around the state and around pride in these public lands and we all depend on the ecological resources and benefits they provide. that's why my legislation takes multifaceted approach. first, it includes an ambitious restoration plan to improve promote fire resilience, and protect ommunities while restoring diverse ecosystems that are naturally adapted to fire and that provide fish habitat. would also establish a partnership to restore public lands and waters that have been
marijuana illegal growth sites which pose significant threats to public safety, law enforcement, wildlife, and water quality. recognizes the importance of the outdoor recreation economy. residents spend almost $2 billion in outdoor recreation each year. legislation would increase recreational opportunities and proposing new visitor centers, overnight expansion of trails for multiple uses such as biking, horseback riding it benefits outdoor enthusiasts and local businesses integral part of the recreation economy. investing in our public lands eans we're also investing in communities near our public lands. collard of the bar 717 ranch told the natural resources
committee last year, the best we can do for these lands for businesses like mine that on untrampled -- is to of wilderness protect them. ours is fueled by people seeking o view the wild beauty of trinity county. the working forest act promotes economic opportunities that recreation resents to our rural communities, economic opportunities. third, this legislation would important wild places on public lands in my district. 262,000 ates roughly acres of wilderness. wild and scenic rivers. these areas include critical salmon for endangered and steelhead, rare native plant and some of the largest intact old growth forests in california. it includes some of the best fishing, hiking, and whitewater runs in the state.
like other pieces of legislation package we're considering today, this takes conservation urgently because it is needed for the future of our planet. and lastly, i'd like to explain developed.ll was over more than three years. in fact, not long after i came 2013, i started asking stakeled hoers what -- policy issues at should be addressed in public lands legislation in my district. repeatedly sat down with constituents, discussed concerns supervisors. i've moved boundaries and removed wilderness proposals ecause of concerns from landowners, the timber industry, and tribes. his level of stakeled hoer participation -- stakeholder participation means i focused what people in northwest alifornia want to see with their public lands. i think this comprehensive, caref crafted legislation has broad support. that's why you see support -- the gentleman's time has expired. mr. huffman: would the
gentlelady yield? i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. r. huffman: conservation organizations, outdoor recreation groups, community adjacent landowners, it's a long and broad list of support. for the he gentlelady time. request a favorable vote for the legislation and yield balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady from colorado reserves, and the idaho is from recognized. chairman --r: madam chair, i r: madam yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. lamalfa. the chair: the gentleman is nafr -- 2 1/2 2 minutes. r. la mall far: i -- mr. lamalfa: i rise in opposition to this bill. nearly 1 1/2 million acres of new wilderness. one bill included in this impact northern california, my area.
of new 262,000 acres wilderness designations despite concerns from local communities they would be impacted. we have seen the devastation that wildfires cause in northern and time and e time again. so why are we putting more land wildernessestrictive category which will make it even more difficult to properly access orests and to them? potential wilderness is tip dlee typically treated as wilderness anyway so you have 51,000 acres that will be as if it's wilderness. we should be prioritizing forest management, not making it more access and the work needing done desperately. in rural northern california, is already land owned by the federal government. local economies depend on access and to hese lands thrive. trinity county is controlled by the federal government. added to land wilderness designation by 2250
is located there. the town of weaverville located in trinity county has had occasions where fire has burned right up to their doorsteps. then, we still pursue endangering them for these lands are not managed. ven to the best efforts of our firefighters, c.c. groups out there trying to get ahead of it, put ourselves behind by having wilderness designations that take away options, take access and to properly manage these lands. urrently within that county, 520,000 acres or 25% are designated as wilderness. it would increase that number to 770,000, 37% of the county. there are concerns these lands wilderness ated as should have been addressed with the local communities ranging from questions about forest grazing t, implications, road decommissioning, and stewardship contracts. the public t help have access? how does that help our firefighters and c.c. have
work? to do the consensus from these local communities most impacted by should be a tions priority. this legislation does not do that. changes he language recommended help mitigated local concerns are accepted. opposition. vote in if it's all about protecting lands, what is it actually rotecting when we are endangering them more so? i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from idaho reserves. is gentlelady from colorado recognized. ms. degette: thank you, madam chair. to recognize the gentleman from california mr. carbajal for three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. carbajal: thank you, representative degette, for your leadership on this very legislation. i am honored to represent the oneral coast of california, of the most beautiful districts in the nation. the los padres
some of forest contains the most stunning, unique, and diverse ecosystems found in the -- in north america. food, i am pleased -- today, i'm support h.r. 2546, the protecting america's wilderness act. preserve the d ecological beauty and recreational opportunities communities in my district and beyond as well as for future generations. this legislation includes my ill, h.r. 2199, the central coast heritage protection act. i am proud to have worked with and man grijalva representative degette and local takeholders to ensure that california's central coast was included in this measure. 3 of this legislation would designate and place into nearly 250,000 acres as wilderness within the los padres forest and the carizo
monument as l wilderness areas. one of the highest forms of available. this is a major step to preserve and protect our communities' generations, ure allows for responsible forest anagement and firefighting activities. t also creates a 400 mile long corridor national recreation trail, connecting the northern los southern portions of the padres national forest by a single hiking route. legislation has been the result of years of collaboration with local stakeholders. is supported by nearly 500 central coast landowners, businesses, farmers, and local officials. this reaffirms that protecting and growing our economy are not mutually exclusive. our public lands are essential. in california alone, the outdoor recreation economy is worth $92
billion and employs 650,000 individuals. i want to thank chairman gri handfula and the committee for their support of this legislation. i urge my colleagues to vote yes and continue uplifting local businesses and economies that rely on outdoor recreation. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady from colorado l colorado reserves. mr. fulcher: i yield four minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. lamborn. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lamborn: i thank the gentleman for his leadership. i rise in strong opposition. collectively, this package of idealogically driven bills impact lands in california, idaho and washington by creating new wilderness, designating 843 miles of scenic rivers and national monument expansion. in colorado alone.
h.r. 2546 would designate approximately 570,000 of new wilderness areas, 23,000 acres of expanded wilderness and 14,000 acres of potential wilderness. and these new designations would be in addition to the already existing 3.5 million acres of public land in colorado that is already designated as wilderness. i commend my colleague from colorado for her efforts to work with local share holders to address some of their concerns. but the bills contained in this package do not achieve the type of balance necessary for bills of this magnitude. many of the local communities impacted by this wilderness package have raised significant concerns including the loss of motorized access and recreation, and multiple use and local threat to local economies. if wilderness designation is imposed, fewer people will have
access to these lands. engaging local stakeholders and considering their on the ground expertise are critical steps in making decisions about public lands management. local communities have concerns with many aspects of this bill. at the july 10, 2019 subcommittee hearing on this bill, the committee heard testimony from month zumba county commission i who shared the county's concern that this bill would negatively impact individual land owners, agricultural entities, first responders and especially the recreation tourism industry, unquote. garfield county opposes this legislation due to concerns with restricting access and increased risk of catastrophic wildfires due to the restrictive management schemes imposed by this legislation. in addition to local grievances, the affected land management
agencies have noted this bill is inconsistent with existing land uses by ash temporarily adding wilderness areas in those areas that are not appropriate. supporting the declaration of areas that do not actually possess these characteristics undermines the integrity of the wilderness act as well as the existing lands that do possess those features. and because of these concerns, the trump administration has rightly issued a veto threat against this partisan bill. to quote from the administration policy, this bill would impose unnecessary and harmful restrictions on 2.5 million acres in california, colorado and washington state and one million acres in the form of wilderness designations. these restrictions will reduce opportunities for multiple uses and limit access to them and
significantly reduce the available productive acreage in working forests, rendering them more prone to catastrophic wildfires, unquote. this highly partisan package is in stark package to what was pass overwhelmingly last year by both chambers and signed into law by president trump. that package was the most sweeping conservation legislation in the last decade. it had begun under the republican house and was successful because it featured the input of a wide coalition of our colleagues and offered support of advocates for public lands, economic development and conservation. we are wasting our time here. i ask my colleagues to oppose this legislation. thank you. the chair: the gentleman from idaho reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i would just point
out to my close friend from colorado, mr. lamborn, there are no multiple use areas in the colorado wilderness act. 2/3 of the area are study areas and being converted and the rest have no motorized use or mining or drilling of any kind. the bill has no conversion of multiple use areas. i yield to the distinguished gentlelady from california, ms. chu. ms. chu: i rise in strong support of h.r. 2546 protecting america's wilderness act. this legislation includes the ext of my bill, h.r. 2215, the which is the result of years of grassroots advocacy and community engagement to improve protections and access for these treasured lands. the mountains are the crown of the los angeles area and provide 30% of our water, 70% of los angeles county's open space and home to historic habitats of
species like the california con sheep. elkhorn this sits in the back yard of the one of the densest areas of our country. offering recreational opportunities like hiking, fishing and camping to the more than 15 million americans that live in the urban area nearby. and that is so important, because the los angeles region is one of the most park poor areas in the country. too many communities do not have access to outdoor recreational activities. and access to outdoor space has benefits for public health. protecting these lands is so important. in 2014, president obama recognized the decades of grassroots support for this goal and granted my request to designate the sa san gabrielle
national monument and made available for cleaner rivers and improved facilities and more rangers to interact with visitors. most importantly, it brought the entire community together to develop a management plan for the mountains with over 40 members representing a variety of stakeholders such as wear agencies, local governments and the business community. but we are still far from done. this same level of resources and protection is needed across the san gabrielle mountains. the legislation before us today would build on the success of the national monument designation by expanding themon youments boupped dries and establishing new and expanded wilderness areas and protecting more than 45 miles of waterways as wild and scenic rivers and establish the critical new
national recreation area to bolster the connection between urban and wild spaces. helping communities in the foothills and along the river corridor improve access to the mountains and offer new recreational opportunities for the residents of los angeles county. this will represents the work of so many and they have come together for a plan that will complete the vision of a vision seamlessly connect todd the beautiful wildlands of its back yard. we have the opportunity to realize that vision and that is why i urge support for h.r. 2546, the protecting america's ilderness act. the chair: does the gentlewoman yield? ms. degette: i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from idaho. mr. fulcher: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from
california, mr. mcclintock. . the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. mcclintock: when republicans were in the majority we set three overarching objectives for our federal lands policy, to restore public access to the public lands, to restore good management to the public lands and restore the federal government as a good neighbor to those communities impacted by the public lands. this bill is the very opposite of these three policies. the purpose of america's public lands was to set aside our most autiful tracts for public, use, resort and recreationation for all time. this bill does the opposite. it imposes severe restrictions on the public's use of 2.5 million acres of their own land. 1.5 million acres would be put off limits to innocent things such as mountain bikes and strollers and remove roads to
reach camp sites or allow emergency equipment to access. and designates 843 miles of our rivers as wild and scenic. you think that sounds good? i can tell you that designation on my river in my district has been used to close tourist aments including swimming pools, horse back riding stables and ice skating and lodging facilities. public use and recreation becomes look, but don't touch. the health and vitality of our forests depends on active scientific forest management, that means protecting them from morbid overcrowding which makes for disease and wildfires. the timber is either burned out or carried out. this bill makes it impossible by
forbidding our foresters to use heir science to protect, and groom our forests. and finally, this bill ignores and insults the communities directly affected by this massive federal land grab. in case after case, local elected officials, local fire districts and local residents in the nearby communities have formally, vigorously protested the restrictions imposed by this measure because they imperil public safety and fire and do wanton harm to the local communities. this bill reverses the three objectives by house republicans. instead of restoring public access, they restrict and denny it. the democrats forbid it and instead of restoring the federal government as a good neighbor, the democrats gives the
communities the finger. you know what obama said about elections have consequences. here it is in real life. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from idaho reserves. the gentlelady from colorado. ms. degette: i yield three minutes to the the gentlewoman from california. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. napolitano: thank you, ms. degette, i rise in strong upport, h.r. 2515 which is included in h.r. 2546 and i associate my remarks with ms. chu as a member of the community, i'm proud of our local organizations that have workt firelessly on expanding the mountains for future generations. the foothills and river corridor attracts millions of visitors
and provide some of the only out door options for los angeles county. h.r. 22215 expands the boundaries and river corridor to be eligible to help clean, protect and our beloved recreation areas. this will bring much needed resources to the community that serves as gateway to the mountains while respecting local rights. water agencies, communities from the area all agree this is a good thing. as california is continued to face with drought, forest fires and climate change, it is critical we support policies such at this. i urge my colleagues to vote yes. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlewoman from colorado reserves and the gentleman from idaho -- mr. fulcher: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from
arizona, mr. gosar. mr. gosar: i would like to thank my friend from idaho for yielding. the legislation represents the same failed policies that caused recent fire seasons to be the worst on record. over 1.5 million acres is created by this bill. mr. speaker, a wilderness designation is the most restrictive land use classification that can be levied by the federal government. wilderness designations hinder federal and state agencies to actively manage our forests and enhances the risk of catastrophic wild liar. i hosted a round table representing state and local governments, animal conservation groups and private companies who are developing tech followings to help us fight the threat of catastrophic fire. every participant spoke to the importance of managing our forests. wildfire prevention saves money, human lives and protects wildlife habitat.
passage of this bill puts this at risk. this legislation represents another attempt to legislate in other members' districts without their support. i highlight the provisions in this deal particularly with colorado. the vast majority of the new wilderness created by this bill is located in mr. tipton and mr. lamborn's districts. this is a continuation of legislation previously taken up by this house restricting mining in my district, that i did not support and attempts by the other side to restrict mining in northern minnesota and oil and gas development, completely against the wishes of local members of congress as well as people back home. legislation like this before us flies in the face what public lands legislation should be. it should be locally driven and benefit those who live closest to those lands. this legislation applies a top-down approach to land management with decrees being
levied from washington, d.c. without the input from local stakeholder. oppose this disastrous legislation and i yield back. . . caller: the gentlewoman from colorado. ms. degette: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. schiff. caller: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. schiff: i rise in strong support of the protecting america's wilderness act. this bill includes a number of worthy initiatives to expand and protect our national heritage and i'm please and grateful the legislation includes the rim of the valley cord door preservation act, a bill i had been working on for 20. the preservation act would expand the santa monica mountains recreation area to include the lands known as the rim of the valley. this includes seamy hills, ver duringo mountains, part of santa san a, an gray beyell --
gabriel foothills, all foreign green spaces in the greater los angeles region. one of the poorest parts of the country. by expanding the national recreation area, the national park service will have the authority to make capitol improvements, like repairing hiking trails and maintaining facilities for public enjoyment, studying wildlife and its habitats, and participating in cooperative conservation with local landowners. it will help ensure wildlife corridors that allows people of los angeles to experience lions, bears, and other precious wildlife in their own backyard. mr. speaker, protecting and embracing our national spaces is very important to me personally. i come from a hiking family. my wife and i love to go on hiking trips with our friends or when we can steal away during the summer, evening hikes through griffith park. from time to time, i like to run alone in the ver duringos -- verdugo's, sometimes with an extra pace. last week i asked my constituents to send some
reflections about what the rim of the valley means to them, along with their favorite pictures of the natural beauty of our region. you can see just a sampling of the beautiful vistas that they sent behind me. i want to say i thank my constituent donald put it best when he said, appreciate how the calm beauty of undeveloped nature replenishes my spirits. everyone, including future generations, should be able to access unspoiled nature. we owe it to ourselves and our children and grandchildren to safeguard these treasures. the rim of the valley corridor preservation act plays an important role in this effort. i want to thank chairman grijalva and his staff for their work on this legislation. i want to thank my colleague, dianne degette, and urge all my colleagues to support h.r. 2546. i thank you. yield back. the chair: the gentleman from
idaho is recognized. mr. fulcher: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from minnesota. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. >> mr. speaker, i rise today in opposition to a completely partisan bill on h.r. 2546, this legislation that grows the reach of the federal government and strong arms local stakeholders. to my colleagues in california, colorado who are involuntary affected by this legislation i stand wufment like you i represent a vast district with significant federal lands. minnesota's eighth is the size of west virginia and features two national forest, a national park, a wild and scenic river, and wilderness area. mr. stauber: like you you have a colleague from an you shalla area in my state legislating in my district as if they know what's best for our constituents and we don't b a month ago a colleague representing part of the twin cities area of plms st. paul introduced a mineral withdrawal, putting more than 235,000 acres off limits. in northern minnesota, the range association of municipalities
and schools sharply rebuked this legislation as the bill promises to deprive schools of millions of dollars in potential revenue. in colorado, h.r. 2546 is opposed by mesa, gar field, and montezuma counties because of their concern about the impacts this expansion can have on their rural communities. what many in washington -- with many in washington d.c. and representatives of urban areas fail to recognize is how much this bill affects the daily lives of rural constituencies. for example, this bill will disallow proper forest management. why not let our loggers clear the timber that leads to forest fires? it will disallow recreational activities like mountain biking. why would we stop activities like that which will help grow our local tourism industries? the national guard bureau is concerned about the high altitude training in this area. why would we impede the readiness of our military. mr. chair, the trend of rejecting the input of local members of congress and local stakeholders is troubling.
whether it be in california, colorado, or my great state of minnesota, all of our constituents ask for us to have a seat at the table and voices heard. please oppose this bill and send a message that locals affected by washington, d.c., legislation need to be heard. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the -- the chair: the gentleman from idaho reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i'm delighted to yield three minutes -- also to thank and yield three minutes to the chairman of the committee, mr. grijalva. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. grijalva: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the gentlelady from colorado for the time. and for her long-standing commitment to public land in her state and throughout the nation. i also want to thank alt sponsors from california to washington that have done tremendous work on individual titles that make up the package of bills before us today. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 2546, protecting
american wilderness act. congress passed the wilderness act in 1964. in response to concerns about population growth and increasing development. the reason for the act is more pressing now than ever. since then wilderness designations have served as a key tool for protecting pristine places in their natural state for the been fit of current and future -- benefit of current and future generations of americans. this package truly embodies the spirit of the wilderness act, something that is often dismissed by many of my colleagues across the aisle. each title was developed through a multiyear collaborative process with diverse and locally driven coalition that have demonstrated these places are worthy of protection as wilderness. they provided a abundant recreational opportunities to help support local economy, each visitors about our nation's diverse heritage, and allow people to find solitude and peace in nature. they protect some of the last and best refuge for wildlife in
the face of a changeling environment -- changing environment and play a vital role in safe gargd the natural systems that our communities rely on. and as climate change increasingly impacts our natural world, designating pristine landscapes as wilderness is one of the most important actions congress can take in response to the climate crisis. this bill prioritizes the long-term conservation of large connected landscapes that provide clean air, clean water, critical wildlife habitat, and intact natural systems that enhance community resilience to this climate crisis. it reflects the heart of the wilderness act. reminding us of our dependence on healthy natural systems and our responsibility to ensure a sustainable environment for future generations. it is no surprise that the trump administration would oppose these designations given the single use mission of the trump administration. which is extraction and profit being the only option for our public lands. while this legislation before us
today represents and recognizes that protection and conservation are public benefits for all americans. i would encourage and my colleagues to support h.r. 2546 and the package of legislation before us and protect these wild places for generations to come and the current generations before us. with that i yield back. it the chair: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from idaho is recognized. mr. fulcher: mr. chairman, i yield four minutes to the gentleman from utah, mr. bishop. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate having the ability of speaking after mr. grijalva, my good friend from arizona, so i can bring some balance into the rhetoric we are doing because somebody has to realize that the idea of conservation, recreation, and economic development in the vast territory we have in the west are not mutually exclusive. they never have been. they never need to be. but the bill we have in front of us today is very unbalanced.
it's pretty ideological, and as yogi berra used to say, it's deja vu all over again. this puts in one half million acres in new wilderness designations, 800 miles of wild and scenic rivers which destroy or shut down all forest management activities in those particular areas, including things like fuel reduction and wildfire mitigation. to put this in perspective for some of you, especially those in the east, the last 10 years there have been 7.3 million acres of our most restricted public lands have been burned out. that's like burning the entire state of massachusetts. all of which was set in this kind of restrictive area. now we want to do or what the majority wants, the democrats want to do is add more to that potential problem. it is unbalanced simply because there is not a single republican who has co-sponsored any of these bills in this package, including the two colorado republicans most directly
impacted by this package. this puts critical military readiness training at risk. this has concerns for private property that have never, never been resolved in elements of this package and doesn't even address the local consensus. this is a bill that the senate will not pass, that the president has already said he's going to reject. earlier in this session as we began we had a lands package that came through. it is a consensus. between democrats and republicans, both here and in the senate, many of these bills were not part of that consensus land package. and for justifiable reasons. because they haven't reached that consensus status. hasn't happened before, which means earl weaver once came out and got thrown out of the game, he looked at the umpire, are you going to get better or is this as going to get it gets? what we should be doing with is realizing instead of creating more problem areas, we should be trying to solve the problem of
land we already own. i'm specifically talking about h.r. 1225, the restore our parks act. we have a maintenance backlog in our parks that is huge and a solution to it that actually works. why are we not bringing that bill to the floor instead of this bill which is destined to fail? we all talk a big game about how much we reserve our national parks. yet when we have the opportunity to do something about it, with a bill that has 330 sponsors and co-sponsors, we have the chance to do it, we don't. for some reason the democrats don't decide to bring that up on the floor so it can move along. instead, they bring packages up here which create more wilderness, more problems, more cost, without having solved any of the underlying problems with these packages. which is why they weren't in the consensus bill we had. we can do better. we need to do bert. we are wasting our time with messaging bills that have no future when we have the
opportunity to do stuff that works. i'm calling on my friends on the other side, put that bill on the floor so we can vote for something that solves our problems and saves our parks. instead of these simply messaging bills that are dedicated to having special interest groups being able to check off the box you did something for them. it's about time we did something that works. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from idaho reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: o i would juts point out -- i would just point out to the gentleman when we did the last land package none of these bills had been brought up for hearing by the then majority. so the gentleman would not have been too happy to have included them in that package. i'm happy to yield one minute to my wonderful colleague from colorado, mr. neguse. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. neguse: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to join my colleagues in support of this important lands package which is not messaging bill, it is a bill that will
protect endangered species, improve climate mitigation, and support our nation's growing outdoor recreation economy. every component of this bill, certainly accomplishes those ends. but in particular the colorado builderness act -- wilderness act, title 1, protects many of colorado's willed ners lands. i can attest to as a yep i have congress' second congressional district. i'm inspired by my colleague, congresswoman degette's, dedication and champion of this cause having worked on this bill for the better part of the last 20 years. tois important that it is impot protect these treasured lands for generations to come. we have a strong tradition of protecting public lands in my home state as the speaker well knows. and this is an important step. at the end of the day, we should
be able to gee on the goal of protecting public lands to ensure they exist for future generations, including for generation of my daughters who is 18 months old now and i look forward to being able to enjoy these incredible public lands with her. at the end of the day, this bill makes sense. it's worth fighting for. let's protect public lands not just in colorado but across the country. urge my colleagues to protect america's wilderness act. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from idaho is recognized. mr. fulcher: i yield myself the remainder of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fulcher: it was alloweded to once but i want to underscore at passage of this would add massive new burdens on federal
gencies. we need those resources to manage what we've already got on public lands and public resources. $2.3 minder, we are trillion in debt. what that means is the federal government is way over its head. can't afford to manage land or take care of it. guess what? . doesn't do it. then we all pay. typically, when things go on fire. mr. chairman, in my state, idaho, because of all that massive amount of federal land, we are more like tenants than we are land lords. our land lord can't afford to fix a broken roof, and that's what we've got with the
responsibility on these government agencies unable to take care of these resources. you have heard testimony from my colleagues many of the local communities impacted have raised significant concerns. loss of access, recreation, elimination of constructive and wise management, threat to rural economies. in addition, the concerns in opposition raised by local stakeholders and counties, some of the provisions of the package are opposed by the actual members who represent these territories. it's troubling. this effort is also funded in part by special interest groups and they will call themselves environmentalists. well, to those people, i just want to communicate. i live in this area. all too often, you don't. we are the real
environmentalists because we take care of our valuable resources. public lands decisions should be made with local input. this set of bills does not do it. they have real consequences on real people. mr. chairman, god gave us a fabulous resource here, but he also gave us a brain. e need to use our brain. now i'm not naive. i know my colleagues across the aisle got to vote for this thing. part of that, some people's thinking in their d.n.a. that wilderness is good. but i would just close by saying this, facts are stubborn things. first fact is, these set of
bills are going nowhere. second fact is, wise management is much better than stagnating this resource. fact number three, when this stalls, and it will, those of us on this side of the aisle, those of us who live in the west will still be here asking for your cooperation in working with us. please don't let pride blind you. work with us on putting some intelligence and some wisdom into managing this resource. mr. chairman, at this point i include a statement of administration policy recommending veto of this bill package. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the
gentlelady from california, ms. brownley. ms. brownley: i thank the gentlewoman for bringing this important public lands bill to the floor. h.r. 2546 incorporates a bill i helped introduce along with representative carbajal. the central heritage protection t set aside more than 40,000 padres and los designates the con door trail as a national recreational trail. they have long been priorities of my constituents and i'm so closed the house is taking action. we incovenience tura county are fortunate to be surrounded by gorgeous public spaces. designating these lands as wilderness will strengthen environmental protections in our
region and preserve this important part of our natural heritage for future generations to enjoy. i thank the gentlewoman again for bringing this bill forward and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from golf e colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from washington state, mr. kilmer. the chair: forked -- the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. kilmer: someone who was born and raised on the olympic peninsula i know how special our region is and public lands contribute to the fabric of who we are. in our region we understand protecting public lands isn't about saving these unforgettable places but means protecting high quality jobs for the next generation as well. someone who worked in economic development i have seen how our
natural resources contribute. each year, millions of people contribute $22 billion in economic impact and support 22,000 jobs. our national treasures have created opportunities for local entrepreneurs who started restaurants, guided tour companies, hotels and other small businesses. it makes sense to protect these special places and i'm proud the house is considering this legislation the wild olympic wild and seenic rivers act. this establishes to protect the last remaining old growth stands on the peninsula and designating rivers as wild and scenic rivers to protect salmon spawning habitat. this has evolved through public engagements with tribes, timber communities, business leaders,
shellfish growers to create a bill that works for our local communities. it's because of that expansive public outreach this bill is supported by more than 800 community leaders, republicans, democrats, sportsmen, mayors, tribal leaders all of whom agree that this proposal moves in the right direction. in addition to protecting access and supporting our outdoor economy, this bill will bolster and protect sources of clean drinking water and salmon and steelhead habitat. just as important as these things. this proposal will not close the commission or restrict access to any existing forest service road or trailhead. it will not impact any timber base in the olympic national forest and i'm doing work to encrease harvest through other avenues. this bill will not affect any private property rights and will not impact how the washington
department of natural resources manages state homeland. and we know that our region's future depends on growing the economy. after years of collaboration this bill represents a clear win-win for the communities i represent. i thank the senior senator, senator murray, for her partnership on this effort and i encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this important legislation. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i now yield myself the remaining time that we have to close. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. degette: mr. chairman, wilderness is not owned by me, it's not owned by any member on the other side of the aisle, not owned by any member of congress, it's owned by the people. it's owned by the people of this country and future generations of this country. and that's why we are the
stewards of this wilderness. these are federal lands. and i heard some of my colleagues on the other side of this debate say well county commissioner doesn't support it. some member doesn't support it. it doesn't matter. these federal lands belong to the public. in fact, last october in colorado, there was a poll done of the areas that are impacted in my portion of the wilderness bill and this poll found that 71% of the people in the affected areas, the citizens, the people who use this land for economic development and recreation believe that these wilderness study areas should be made permanent and should be made into wilderness and that's what i believe. i want to tell you one more story, mr. chairman, and that's the story in august, when i went down to cortez, colorado, near three of the wilderness areas in my bill, one of the three county
commissioners who testified in congress that he represents that area. in cortez, colorado, the city council, the mayor supports this bill. and at a town hall meeting, there were 75 people and 65 raised their hands when i asked if they supported the bill. that's who this is for. and that's who we need to think about and listen to as we pass this legislation. the areas in this bill all have strong wilderness characteristics and owe it to our children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren to take bold action right now and preserve them. i want to take a minute and thank everyone who has been involved. obviously, the chairman of the committee, his staff, chris, brandon, henry, cameron and lilly and my staff who have worked on this bill for over 20
years now, lisa cohen, my chief staff, kylea, tom and mark, all who have worked their guts out for this as well as many other staffers past and present. and finally, i want to thank the citizens who brought this bill to me to begin with and continue to work their hearts every day to preserve our wild places. today o can't be with us and mark pearson who was sitting on a cliff high up in one of my wilderness areas and now sitting in the gallery watch us pass this historic legislation. it truly is a labor of love. and i look forward to telling my grandchildren about this historic day. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman has yielded back. all germ debate has expired.
the bill shall be considered for mendment under the five-minute rule. printed in the bill, in the amendment of the nature of substitute consisting of the rules committee print 116-50 shall be considered as adopted. the bill as amended shall be considered as the organization bill under the five life minute rule. no further amendment shall be in order except those printed in house report 116-395. each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report by a member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and opponent, shall not be the subject to amendment and not subject for demand of
the division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in house report 116- 395 . for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report number 116-395, offered by ms. degette of colorado. the chair: pursuant to the house resolution 844, the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. degette, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from colorado. ms. degette: thank you, mr. chair. the amendment i offer today adds four additional unique wilderness areas to the state of colorado totaling more than 60,000 acres to our bill protect america's wilderness act. the addition of these areas stem from extensive conversations hi with local stakeholders, tribes, and outdoor recreation groups.
the first one is diamond break, wailederness study area in northwest colorado that is attached to our state's beloved dinosaur national monument. this area was recommended for wilderness designation by the bureau of land management under george h.w. bush. it's a favorite among the many rafters, kayakers, and can intoers who visit the national monument every year and preserving it has been a priority for many conservation groups in my state. protecting this land will help provide economic security for an area of the state that depends heavily on outdoor recreation economy. the amendment also further protects pa puce canyon, another wilderness study area in southwest colorado near cross canyon which is the area i mentioned that i visited last august. it has been a wilderness study area since 1980. it lies within the canyon of the ancient national monument and was an estimated 100 ancestral
pueblo sites per square mile has significant value. by official ily designating this area as federally protkted wilderness, we will permanently preserve this sacred land for generations to come. finally, mr. chairman, this amendment protects north and south ponderosa gorge which is often referred to as the southwest secret of colorado. according to the bureau of land management, nearly 13,000 visitors come to this region every month during its peak season. it's a favorite among those looking to launch their nonmotorized boats, or back tack into the mountains and protecting this land has also been a priority for conservationists in colorado for decades. while each -- each of these areas would be protected under this amendment is unique, they are some of the most incredible wilderness that our state has to offer. countless coloradoans when they found that this bill was coming forward came and asked me to
include these three unique areas in the legislation, and i hope my colleagues will honor their request and accept this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> rise to claim opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i do rise in opposition to the amendment before us. apparently the bill that is before us today didn't include enough wilderness in my district. as we see in this amendment, we are now trying to be able to add more. the amendment adds an additional 60,000 acres of wilderness in colorado. one proposed addition that's particularly concerning because as local opposition is the pa puce canyon. montezuma and dough loreries counties oppose this session degs. the wilderness study area falls within the canyon of the ancients national monument, which i have worked to preserve.
mr. tipton: it already has strict federal protections. so wilderness designation is not necessary. again the b.l.m. has studied these lands and found this many to be unsuitable, unsuitable for wilderness. montezuma and dough loreries counties have requested -- dolores counties have asked it be released because the canyon is surrounded by private land that has created challenges when it comes to wildfire prevention. the pa puce -- pap puce wilderness was not originally in the bill. considering the objections we are here lating a last-minute amendment. i oppose this amendment and encourage my colleagues who believe that local voices must be a part of any land management decision to vote no. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i'd like to ask
unanimous consent to place in the record a letter from a coalition of groups, the san juan citizens alliance, sierra club, sheet mountain alliance, conservatives for responsible stewardship, and western colorado alliance urging me to include these areas in the bill. the chair: the gentlewoman's request will be covered by general leave. ms. degette: i thank the chairman. these areas have all been protected for years. two of them have already been wilderness study areas. as i mentioned they are in the area of the state where there is widespread public support and where they also are great economic drivers. they are appropriately contained in this bill. as i said, when these groups -- when these groups found out that this bill was moving along, they urged me to include these really important historical and recreational areas in the bill. i just want to say one last thing. i forgot to thank steve who is with conservatives for
responsible stewardship. he's been a real partner with us throughout making the conservative argument why we need to protect wilderness. i would urge adoption of my amendment and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. tipton: thank you, mr. chairman. i do appreciate the comments. here's the reality. in the canyon of the ancients and area that i'm speaking to, these are already protected lands. the b.l.m. when we are talking about a wilderness study area, has stated that these do not qualify as wilderness. when we look at our county commissioners, they are going to be the ones in our remote rural areas that are going to be responsible for dealing with potential of wildfire, which is something that all coloradoans ought to be well concerned about. without their support, with recognition that this land is protected, and with the b.l.m. stating that this does not
qualify as a wilderness area, i would encourage my colleagues to vote no on this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. many the question is the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from colorado. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the gentleman from colorado. mr. tipton: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from colorado will e postponed. the speaker pro tempore: it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. mcclintock: i have an
amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate. the clerk: amendment number 2, offered by mr. mcclintock of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 844, the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the member from california. mr. mcclintock: the federal government owns just seven 10th of one percent of the state of illinois. it owns just 1.8% of the entire state of texas. in fact the federal government only owns one fourth of washington, d.c. then go farther west and you'll see the problem. the federal government owns and controls 62% of the state of alaska, 2/3 of utah, and 4/5 of the state of nevada. it owns nearly half of my home state of california. in one county in my district, alpine county, the federal government owns 96%. people from the east have no idea what that means.
that's all land that's off the local tax roles. that's all that carries increasingly severe restrictions on public use and access which means it's generating very little economic activity for those regions. and often federal ownership means the federal land use policies are in direct contravention to the wishes of the local communities that are entangled with t when we republicans held the majority, one of our federal land objectives was to restore the federal government as a good neighbor to those communities directly impacted by the federal lands. the bill before us does exactly the opposite. this bill adds 1.5 million acres of federal land to wilderness restrictions. you can't even bring a stroller on these lands. this land grab is strongly opposed by the local communities it would directly affect. the mesa county commission in garfield county, colorado, opposed this bill because of concerns it will further restrict public access and
increase the risk of fire. the congressman representing those areas opposed the legislation. 80% of the county in california is already owned by the state and federal government and their board of supervisors is protesting the further restriction of public access to these lands noting these lands don't even meet wilderness criteria. trinity county is also formally opposed to the bill, yet we are plowing ahead anyway. the monrovia city council protests the enormous economic burdens this bill would place on their city. the graves harbor county commission and city councils of aberdeen in washington state beg us not to impose these restrictions on their communities. i could go on. representing the sierra nevada of california, i can tell you there are no more fierce or knowledgeable guardians of our forests than the people who live among them. my amendment simply restores the good neighbor policy that republicans practiced for many
years. it simply provides that wilderness restrictions cannot be imposed until the county in which the land is located approves of them. i would ask our democratic colleagues to show a little humility and a little mercy in exercising their power by listening to the people most affected by their decisions and adopt this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. degette: thank you. i'm so glad that the author of this amendment has asked us to listen to the people who this affects because we have. that's why we found out that 71% of the people in the affected areas, the citizens, support this legislation. that's why when i went to cortez, colorado, and had a town hall, and there were 75 people there, 65 of them said they were in support of the wilderness
areas. we shouldn't allow one or two local elected officials or even members of congress to have veto power over preservation of federal lands for future generations. if this amendment were adopted and the bill enacted, local governments would be able to indefinitely delay a federal land designation approved by the house, senate, and signed into law by the president. wilderness designation, which is the highest level of protection that we bestow, is solely at the discretion of congress and has been so since the original wilderness act. it's intended to provide permanent protection for exceptional landscapes and it's a key tool for preserving undisturbed lands. so what are we going to do? are we going to be at the whim of local elections to decide who should support it? and who do we decide? why do the county commissioners get veto power? what about the mayors and city councils? the montezuma county, county
commissioners, may owe ose the designation of the wilderness -- oppose the designation of the wilderness study areas, the council and mayors support t that's why we have to hear what the people have to say. no individual elected official from a commissioner to a member of congress should have the ability to unilaterally veto these things. all of the areas included in all of the titles of this bill are the result of a multiyear collaborative efforts between bill sponsors and stakeholders on the ground. we have to remember these lands are publicly owned. they are not privately owned. they belong to every american and future generations. now, frankly, i think that as members of congress we have the responsibility to listen to our constituents and to listen to the people of the united states and the people of the united states want to preserve the very few special remaining wild place that is we have. i encourage my colleagues to
vote no on this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yield. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: i would simply ask if the gentlelady is true, then local people affected by this bill actually support it, then what does she have to fear from getting their approval? her opposition to this amendment puts the lie to her claim that the local people support it and tells us she doesn't believe her own rhetoric. the father of the u.s. forest service for good behavior by foresters. he said among other things, the public official is there to soist public and not run them. public support of acts affecting public rights is absolutely required. it's more trouble to consult the public than ignore them, but that is what you're hired to do. get rid of an attitude of personal arrogance or pride of
attainment or superior knowledge. mr. chairman, this bill turns these maxims upside-down. it says the local residents, we know what's best for you and your communities, your opinions are unimportant to us, your wishes are irrelevant. and your voices are unheard. we are in charge and we'll dam well do as we please. i ask my democratic colleagues to step back and consider how you would react to a government that takes such an attitude as that. my amendment simply asks the people and trusts the people. if we are still a government of, by, and for the people, that's the least we can do. i yield back. the chair: the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the nos have it. mr. mcclintock: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on
the amount offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. mcclintock: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 3 rinted in house report 116-395 offered by mr. mcclintock of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 844, the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock and a member opposed each will control five minutes. mr. mcclintock: when the wilderness act was adopted in 1964, it designated about nine million acres, a little larger than the state of maryland. over the years that has ballooned to 111 mill yone acres, the land area the size of california. this bill adds 1.5 million, that
is the size of dare and rhode island combined. restrictions in wilderness areas are severe. you can't drive to a camp site. the wilderness act provides for wilderness designation only for those lands and listen to this, an area where the earth and community of life are untraveled by man when man is a visitor who does not remain and quote, an area of vun developed federal land retaining its character without permanent improfments which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions. much of the land in this bill doesn't begin to meet this criteria. the department of interior and local communities directly affected are warning that this new federal grab includes acreage on which there are buildings and roads, grazing and off-road trails, communication
towers, small businesses, mines, oil wells. moreover, motorized firefighting is allowed on these lands but would be severely restricted if the land is designated as wilderness. all you can use in a wilderness area is a hand saw, a shovel and an axe to fight a fire. to inclued such acreage makes a mockry of its original intent and is a threat to livelihoods, jobs, safety and quality of life for the communities adjacent to them. abraham lincoln told a farmer who said, i ain't greedy for land, i just want what is next to mine. it is is a devastating effect. the amendment i offered provides that the relevant agricultural or interior can exempt those
lands contained in this bill that do not meet the legal requirements of the wilderness act or the wild and scenic rivers act, restoring the original intent of these laws. i reserve. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: in time in opposition. thank you, many chair. this amendment is another attempt to seek congressional responsibility. i can assure the gentleman that every piece of land in this bill that is designated as wilderness is, in fact, wilderness. gentleman is right in the statutory definition of wilderness, there is no motorized equipment, there's no mining or drilling. i will say for firefighting, you don't have to use shovels but other things. wilderness should be reserved
for those very few special areas that are trun traveled by man just like the wilderness act says. i will also guarantee, mr. chair, that every acre that is designated wilderness has been gone over by the sponsors, by the citizens, by the activists and qualifies as wilderness. in the colorado wilderness act, 2/3 of the areas have been managed as wilderness because the wilderness study areas and been managed as wilderness for over 30 years. these areas are wilderness. why then would i object to this amendment? cedes power to the executive branch. and in this administration, that is the last thing we should do in deciding what wilderness bill is. if this amendment were adopted and the bill is enacted, the
secretary would be unilaterally empowered to veto designations of wilderness enacted by congress and signed by the president. this amendment would give unprecedented and problematic power to the secretary to override congress based on no criteria other than what they wanted to do. now if my colleagues had questions if these areas are worthy of designation, they only have to look at the bill report, where we extensively documented the outstanding values of the public lands and rivers included in this bill. now, i would just challenge the gentleman to tell me which of the wilderness designations in this legislation do not meet wilderness criteria, because it's for congress to make that decision, not the executive branch. and we need to retain our article 1 power every day and in every way. for that reason, i oppose this
amendment. and i resevere the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: once again i would ask the gentlelady if what she says is true if the lands meet the legal requirements, she has nothing to fear. only where the land does not can the secretary exempt it. one of the objectives we set when in majority was restore public access of the public lands. this is set aside for the use and enjoyment of the american people and includes a wide range of activities which are prohibited under wilderness designation. such severe restrictions on public access should be used very carefully and sparingly. my amendment says the lands affected by this bill must meet the legal definitions. it doesn't modify those acts.
it affirms them. aside a private reserve of the royal court. commoners were restricted from these lands. they were so resented by the british people that no fewer than five clauses in magna carter were addressing these grievances. these are lands set aside for the common enjoyment of the american people and all the many and varied outdoor activities that they cherish. by ignoring the legal definitions of the wild and scenic rivers act and wilderness acts, fast tracts of land held for and by the public, the democrats undermine support. no one is above the law. that includes congress. this amendment assures that the
lands affected by this bill meet the criteria of the original laws that they invoke. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: well, i do agree that wilderness is reserved for those very special few areas that are left that truly are wild. i challenge the gentleman to tell me which area -- which acre in this bill does not meet the wilderness act criteria, and he did not do so. and that's because every acre of wilderness that my co-sponsors and i have designated meet that criteria. it's been vetted and one of those very few pristine areas we should protect. by the way, in colorado, even if this bill is adopted, still only less than 10% of our land will
be wilderness and as it should be. because wilderness should be protected as a wild area. i will say, though, that's not what this amendment does. what this amendment does is it cedes determination of what is wilderness from the congress who should be determining this to the administration. another erosion of article 1 power. and that's why i oppose this amendment and urge a no vote and i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the nos have it. mr. mcclintock: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will e postponed. it is now in order to consider
amendment number 4 printed in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. brown: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 4 printed in house report 116-395 offered by mr. brown of maryland. the chair: the gentleman from maryland, mr. brown, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland. mr. brown: i yield myself such time as i may consume and thank the chairman and congresswoman degette for their hard work on this bill. our public lands are iconic features of the american landscape and our duty to present vemb and protect these treasured lands and be responsible stewards so that future generations can enjoy them as much as we do today. this act recognizes that
irreplaceable value of public lands in our lives by safeguarding public wars in colorado, california and washington. the value of their lands goes beyond their diversity and offer our veterans an opportunity to heal after they return home from the front lines. my amendment strengthens this bill promotes the health and wellness of our veterans and service members through access to lands protected within this bill. outdoor recreation and participation in volunteer programs. tos is providing therapeutic our veterans. as they transition to civilian life, public lands have been shown to recover and heal. we make a promise to every veteran and it is our duty to serve them as they have served us and make sure they can benefit from all our landscapes
offer. not only doing so, we help those who continue to serve our country today. i ask my colleagues to support this amendment and the underlying bill. i yield to the minority manager. the chair: the gentleman from idaho is recognized. mr. fulcher: just want to make a comment. having been shy so far today, we haven't over here on criticizing when we see issues. and just wanted to communicate with you in this case, we also want to point out the positive things and we support your amendment. we commend you for bringing that forward. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. brown: i say thank you to the gentleman and all the members of congress who not only during the course of this bill and the amendments and debate, but as a tradition in a bipartisan manner supporting our men and women in uniform, those
who have worn the uniform and veterans and families. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. does any member seek time in opposition? , the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from maryland. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 5 printed in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. panetta: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 5
printed in house report 116-395 offered by mr. panetta of california. the chair: the gentleman from california, mr. panetta and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair miss panetta: i rise to offer an amendment today to h.r. 2546, protecting america's willed ners act. as we know, this bill would provide permanent protections for approximately 1.3 million acres of federal land, including in california, and 1,200 miles of rivers. not onlylogical it provide vital protections for some of our most precious natural resource, but it will also improve outdoor recreational opportunities for underserved communities. my amendment ensures that as we work to protect, conserve, and enjoy federal public land, we also prioritize the safety of our communities. this amendment gives the
authority to the secretaries of the interior and agriculture to ensure that they are able to manage for fire, insects, and disease in wilderness areas, particularly during times of crisis. in california, we are, unfortunately, no stranger to the threat of wildfires. with climate change, wildfire seasons are becoming wildfire years. wildfires do not stop at property lands. so neither should our federal efforts to combat wildfires and better manage our forestland. as we work to fight the effects of climate change anti-impacts on our forest, we must also take every action that we can to protect the families and the homes in these vulnerable communities. in putting forward new and critical protections on land from the redwood to the loss padres national forest, we must ensure our federal land managers have the flexibility that they need to take the reasonable and
necessary actions to address fire, insects, and disease threats to this land. thank you, mr. speaker. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from -- for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? mr. fulcher: i ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition, although i am not opposed. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. fulcher: thank you, mr. chairman. as stated this amendment allows secretary of the interior, secretary of agriculture to manage for fire, insects, disease, wilderness areas designed -- designated by this act. again, not opposed to that, but just want to point out in real life what really happens. many wilderness areas are overgrown and suffer from insect infestation. we have already talked about that. and that contributes significantly to uncontrollable wildfires that really don't
respect man-made boundaries very well. in wilderness areas, the reality is that fires are allowed to continue. they are only suppressed once they leave that wilderness boundary. that's a particular bummer for wildlife. haven't talked about what happens in those situations, but wildlife is often decimated by this type of activity. the other thing i wanted to point out is that mechanized fire mitigation tools are banned in wilderness areas for anybody. including the department of the interior or agriculture. forest service. it's another thing that is bothersome about all this is when we make these designations we throw out common sense ability to use appropriate tools when there is problems. this amendment, again, we are in support of it, this amendment will do nothing to improve the conditions in these wilderness
areas. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. panetta: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to yield two minutes to my good friend, representative carbajal, from the southern coast of california. the chair: the honorable gentleman from california, mr. carbajal, is recognized for two minutes. mr. carbajal: thank you for offering this important amendment which further clarifies nothing this this build would hinder any fuel management or fire suppression activities on our public lands. i represent the central coast of california, and we have seen our share of wildfires. i believe that if we can take preventive measures to address any wildfire risks, we should. as the former county supervisor for santa barbara county, i experienced firsthand the obstacles and challenges of balancing red tape and coordinating amongst stakeholders. as a super ayesor, i helped
implement the first community wildfire protection plan in santa barbara county. i support representative panetta's amendment because it reaffirms, it reaffirms that this legislation would not interfere with any firefighting or fuels management activities. the underlying bill we are debating here today would not do that. specifically section 305-b of my bill explicitly addresses these concerns. i would urge my colleagues to support this amendment as well. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from, mr. panetta, reserves. the gentleman has the time. mr. panetta: i want to thank my good friend and neighbor to the south, representative carbajal, i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman has the only time remaining. the gentleman from idaho has yielded back his time.
the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. panetta: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. it the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the -- mr. fulcher: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california, mr. anetta, will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 6 printed in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? mr. westerman: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 6 printed in house report number 116-395, offered by mr. westerman of arkansas.
the chair: pursuant to house resolution 844, the gentleman from arkansas, mr. westerman, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from arkansas. mr. westerman: thank you, mr. chairman. this is a commonsense amendment that will help ensure that the lands designated as wilderness in this package are not areas that are subject -- that are high risk of catastrophic wildfire. one of the clear flaws of the package before us is the apparent arbitrary process that was taken in determining the areas to designate as wilderness. at the hearing that included the bills in today's package, the b.l.m. and forest service conveyed findings that a significant number of the proposed wilderness additions are not suitable to be added to the wilderness system. it is critically important that wilderness designations are carefully applied due to their highly restrictive limitations. and to make sure to take into account existing uses of the land that could be limited, including wildfire risk.
the amendment of public lands at high risk for catastrophic wildfire is truly sobering. just last year the chief of the forest service warned that a billion acres of land across america are at risk of catastrophic wildfire. this is especially true in the three states addressed in the legislation before us. all three of which rank in the top 10 nationally for severe threat of wildfire. california number one, colorado number three, and washington number six. mr. chairman, filed a bill today to plant a trillion trees. we can use forests to help mitigate spheric carbon. when we lock these forests away in illederness areas, we are taking that off the table and adding to climate change by putting wilder -- forests at risk of catastrophic wildfire that emit carbon. this is a commonsense amendment. we don't need to be putting these areas into wilderness area and taking them off the table to use in fighting the mitigation
of carbon. this amendment will make sure that we are not unwisely designating areas that have been identified as high risk of catastrophic wildfire. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment. i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from arkansas reserves. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: to claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. degette: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. under the panetta amendment that we just debated -- unlike the panetta amendment we just debated, the westerman amendment contains no action or management prescription to address wildfire risk on our public lands. instead, the amendment is another attempt by my colleagues to override congress' constitutional responsibility to make law and instead give political appointees overly broad and unilateral authority to essentially veto an act of congress. this amendment contains the
false narrative that wilderness is a no management designation and that any protective designation will inherently increase wildfire risk. that is not true and it's the opposite. wilderness areas are some of our most resilient natural landscapes. wilderness areas are usually far away from homes and other developed areas. they don't contain power lines or roads which are major classes of human cause ignitions as we saw with the recent california fires f a fire does start in a wilderness area, these landscapes are best equipped to endure those periodic disturbances which can achieve important management objectives and enhance habitat and ecosystem functions. here we have a photo provided to me by my colleague, mr. carbajal, which illustrates this point. it's a wilderness area included in this bill. if you look at this area for a moment, you can see this is not an area that's appropriate for logging, but you can also see
some charred wood from a recent fire. but overall look at how this area has regrown and the beautiful flowers that bloomed after the fire. this is what a resilient landscape looks like. it's what we are protecting in this bill. furthermore, and we have said this over and over and over, i can't stress it enough, there is nothing that prevents suppression of an act of wildfire in a wilderness area. anti-wilderness act allows management activities if they are necessary to address fire, insects, and diseases, which is referenced in no one certain terms by mr. panetta's amendment. wildfire like climate change is an issue that always should be on our mind and inherent in our policies, but this red herring narrative that wilderness designation inherently increases wildfire is just simply not played out. i encourage my colleagues not to give in to these false
assumptions and oppose this amendment. i urge a no vote and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: i would urge my colleagues to look at the science. look at the law, look what wilderness area means. it means untrambled by man. it means man has a hands off approach to it. wilderness areas can be resilient to fire if they are designated appropriately, but when we have the experts at the b.l.m. and the forest service saying these lands are not suitable for wilderness area when these areas are close to roads, when they are close to homes and property, we are treading on dangerous ground here. we are not applying the science, we are not applying the opinions of the experts. we are just saying we want to randomly call something wilderness area and think randomly our approach will be suppression. if our idea of management is suppression, we are losing ground. we should be doing things to prevent fire, prevention is worth a -- an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure. if our plan is that we are just going to roll the dice and -- we can't put the fire out when these wilderness areas catch on fire, i think we are sending the wrong message and making bad policy. again i encourage my colleagues to vote for this amendment that's common sense and will do good in the long run. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from arkansas reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: thank you, mr. chairman. just to reiterate, the way it works right now with existing wilderness areas is that the region that is managing that wilderness area can decide how -- obviously taking into account that it's a wilderness area, if it's a remote area where burning as we are just saw in this photo would benefit the ecosystem, they are allowed to burn as they are in other areas of federal land. t if the regional director
management plan let's say a wilderness area is near an urban interface and it looks like homes are -- lives may be put at risk. they are allowed under the wilderness act to take that ction. i think that the amendment--the panetta amendment makes that clear. i think that that allows us, the power that we have in designating wilderness. and again we shouldn't offload our power to the executive branch or any other branch of government, i urge a no vote on this amendment and i yield back he balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from yields. the mr. westerman chloe shouldn't be putting willerness -- areas into wilderness that
are claus to -- close to where people live. and taking management completely off the table. i have wilderness areas in my district and in my state, and they are managed as wilderness areas, which means they are not managed at all. again, this is common sense. listen to the experts. if this area is not suitable to be in a wilderness area, we shouldn't be designating it in -- designating it a wilderness area, i encourage my colleagues to vote for this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman from arkansas yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arkansas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the it. have the amendment is not agreed to. mr. westerman: mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. chair: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 -- pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arkansas will be postponed.
it's in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in house report 116-391. for what purpose does the gentleman from are arkansas seek recognition? mr. westerman: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 house report 116-395 offered by mr. westerman of arkansas. to house pursuant resolution 844, the gentleman from arkansas, mr. westerman, will member opposed, each control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the entleman from arkansas, mr. westerman. mr. westerman: thank you, mr. chairman. of amendment strikes all the wilderness designations proposed in this package which a vague thing which gives broad discretion to designate areas as wilderness at a time. as previously mentioned, one of the clear flaws of the package before us is the arbitrary
taken into was determining the areas to designate as wilderness. this shortcoming, unfortunately, extends to the potential wilderness designations in the bill as well. the landtestimony from management agencies raised concerns about many of these designations. not posing appropriate -- not oe sewing -- possessing appropriate wilderness characteristics. for example, in the washington portion of this package, many of 5,000 acres are set to ecome potential wilderness are largely near roads, include large amounts of harvested timber. these are roads that proponents want to close. however, this is the wrong way that. locking up vast swaths of land s a bad way to manage federal land. i reiterate, if we want to do atmospheric ut carbon, locking them up where we can't touch this is not the way it.hould do we should be investing in ustainable, proactive measures
that have local input. this amendment will remove some packagembiguity of this and allow local communities to benefit from lands and roads in areas. it's for these reasons i ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment and i reserve my time. the gentleman from arkansas reserves. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman is minutes.ed for five ms. degette: thank you, mr. chairman. plain and simple, this amendment potential e all the wilderness from this bill, which acres.over 130,000 my colleagues are using this amendment to claim that the in this bill as don't meet the definition or intent of wilderness designation. what, that's exactly why they're designated as potential wilderness. are areas that are for all intents and purposes wilderness, a small nonconforming use. now, since the quotation marks
amendment description seem to show some lack of understanding about this i'd like to explain it for the record. a potential wilderness means that typically an area has wilderness characteristics but it there's a that nonconforming use or activity that would otherwise be by a standard wilderness designation, which is exactly what my colleagues on side of the aisle keep trying to argue. hey keep trying to say, well, you can't have motorized activities, you can't have this nd that in wilderness, and they're right, but that's why some of these areas are wilderness. some examples of potential wilderness allowances that would this amendment include allowing redwood forest allowing trail reconstruction using heavy equipment, and allowing the high operations icopter in colorado to continue in
potential wilderness because uses are not appropriate areas erness but these have strong wilderness characteristics but for that one activity. wilderness designations simply say this. manage the area for wilderness characteristics but continue to allow the specific activity. and then, when that nonconforming use is removed, area will then revert to wilderness, because mostly is.'s what it potential wilderness provides xactly the type of management flexibility that my colleagues claim is needed for certain areas, but they want to strike designations from the bill. frankly, it seems a little backwards to me. of my friends on the other side of the aisle, i know t can be hard to see these areas for anything other than ieir extracted potential, but see it from the other side of the coin.
hese areas are strong wilderness areas. they just have a small onconforming use that will eventually be removed, restoring these areas to wilderness, and why those areas are called potential wilderness. i urge a no vote on this i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from colorado reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: thank you, mr. chairman. there's a couple things i'd like to point out here. is, i'm having a hard time understanding the logic. i appreciate the gentlelady explain what these potenti potential wilderness areas are. last amendment, the gentlelady pointed out we shouldn't be ceding any power to which cutive branch designating something as potential wilderness area would cede all that power to the to determine if that could be a wilderness area in the future. is a is a second -- there process to designate wilderness areas. studyalled the wilderness area. we've done that all across the country.
state, en it done in my and there are certain criteria that you have to meet when you're in a wilderness study to be designated wilderness. now, congress can change the law if they want to. they can violate the wilderness protection act that was put in not a wise hat's thing to do. for instance, there's an area in my state that's in a wilderness study area that's got beautiful those trees are log loly pine trees and on lolly pine trees and on that site they are nonnative on that site. you can put that into wilderness area, but by definition, you non-native tree species on that site. those are the things the they go look for when through a wilderness study proprogram and when they propose wilderness. them just haphazardly doing it and putting it in areas where it be and designating potential wilderness is leaving the science out of it and it's
making it all about politics. again, i encourage my colleagues to be rational and to vote for amendment. and i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from arkansas reserves. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. degette: i'm prepared to ready.f the gentleman is think i have the right to close. so i'll reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: mr. chairman, again, i encourage adoption of commonsense amendment that we let the science rule, that we available, our precious land and our precious this fight use in through atmospheric carbon, to make the world a better place environmental stewardship for the future. that's why i offered this why i encourage my colleagues to support it. ien why. -- with that i yield back the
balance of my time. the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california is -- colorado is recognized. degette: the acres of potential wilderness in this there are in -- many sections of this egislation and they all have strong wilderness characteristics but for one nonconforming use which will be gone.ally in which case it's imperative hat we manage these areas as wilderness. that's why i oppose this amendment and i urge my and i ues to vote no yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from yields back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arkansas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. amendment is not agreed to. mr. westerman: mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arkansas will be postponed.
it's now in order to consider mendment number 8 printed in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the entleman from south carolina seek recognition in mr. cunningham: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will amendment.the the clerk: amendment number 8 rinted in house report 116-395 offered by mr. cunningham of south carolina. to house pursuant resolution 844, the gentleman from south carolina, mr. unningham, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from south carolina, cunningham. mr. cunningham: thank you, mr. chair. i rise in support of my will make hich crystal clear that our men and women in uniform can continue to affected by this bill to conduct the training safe.eed to keep us the underlying bill will designate over a million acres f federally owned land as new or potential wilderness
safeguarding these important atural resources for americans to enjoy for generations. but these lands not only provide outdoor recreation areas, they support as an training ground for our armed forces as they prepare to defend our country overseas. bipartisan, commonsense amendment would ensure our military aviators can continue training missions and transfers the more -- traverse 1.3 million acres of wilderness designated by this act. now, this is critical because affected by this bill are currently used by service members at the high altitude national guard aviation training site which is epresented by my colleague, congressman tipton, who joined me in offering this amendment. only place y is the military helicopter pilots can learn the advanced power needed to skills safely operate thousands of feet above sea level. the mountainous regions our troops presently operate in
iraq and afghanistan, it's critically important that these training operations uninterrupted. our public lands management agencies have a long history of orking with our military leaders. when it comes to protecting our public lands, this amendment conservation and national security can go hand in hand. urge my colleagues to join me in supporting my amendment, ensuring that our service utilize an continue to america's die verse natural resources -- diverse natural us to fight prepare and win in any environment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the rise?man >> i ask to claim time in opposition though i am not opposed. without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. westerman: thank you. i'd like to thank my colleague, cunningham, for putting forward this amendment. i do rise in opposition though
the amendment. i'm glad to join my colleague from south carolina as o-sponsor, ultimately, of this amendment. mr. tipton: to be able to ensure the military overflights can continue. areas that will be designated wilderness under the protecting america's wilderness act. my good friend from south carolina is aware, my district s home to the high altitude army national guard aviation our men ande, where women in uniform learn how to ly safely rotary wing aircraft in the highality tuitt altitude s -- high moutous areas. areas.tainous it is essential that when the aviation training to take place for the readiness is our armed forces that it not interfering with the current and future wilderness proposals introduced in nd congress. although the gentleman's
amendment doesn't deal with the do e of landing zones, i believe it's an important rotection and a promising step forward. i'd ask my colleagues to be able to support this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields balance of his time. the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. mr. unningham: thank you, chairman. in closing, i want to thank my friend from colorado, mr. in on, for joining me offering this bipartisan amendment. also want to thank chairman grijalva and my colleagues on resources committee for their work on this important legislation. and i hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me in supporting this amendment which will make clear hat our military can continue to utilize the airspace above these newly designated areas.ness i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment the gentleman from south carolina. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to.
mr. cunningham: i'd ask for a vote, mr. chair. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from south carolina will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 9 printed in house report number 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. tipton: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 9 printed in house report number 116-395, offered by mr. tipton of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 844, the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton. mr. tipton: i would like to enter into the record letters and resolutions from county commissioners and montezuma county commissioners in opposition to the legislation that we have on the floor today. the chair: the gentleman's
request will be covered under general leave. mr. tipton: thank you, mr. chair. the majority of the land in title 1 of the underlying bill would be converted into wilderness and it's in my district. while i'm never pleased when another member of the house tries to tell my constituents what's best for therges i get especially frustrated when they ignore the opinions of elected officials in the communities in which they are seeking to make land management designations. for instance, i think that designating wilderness between denver and boulder to be able to cut down on the challenges the state is facing with population growth might be something to be able to k. but something i have refrained from introducing as such proposal. the underlying bill seeks to convert several wilderness study areas in the third congressional district into wilderness. the two that i focused on in this amendment are in montezuma county. during the hearing on the underlying bill, montezuma county commissioner testified in
opposition to the proposed wilderness additions in the county. in a letter he sent to me and the bill's sponsor, the board of county commissioners wrote, we have consistently opposed since the act was first proposed. what you asked permanently withdraw those portions of montezuma county included in the bill as per the b.l.m. and our recommendations. since the early 1990 earks montezuma county has collaborated with federal managers in an effort to develop public lay management strategies to provide reasonable and responsible protection for our natural resources and wildlands. this collaboration has built an effective working relationship with federal lay managers that allows us to better protect natural resources while also ensuring that the public has access to their public lands. we believe we already have a good strategy in place for the protections of the w.s.a.'s
being proposed for wilderness. that maintains or improves their current characteristics for future generations while providing better access for the public to enjoy those lands in a responsible and appropriate manner. in the letter commissioners mentioned the b.l.m.'s recommendation. this is because the b.l.m. studied the lands that my colleague is proposing to be added to wilderness and determined that they are not, that they are not suitable. n fact, one of the parcels has a bulldozer sitting on that land. this doesn't mean that the standard -- meet the standard of untrammled by man. aside from the fact that the b.l.m. has determined that these lands are not suitable for wilderness, the current w.s.a. designation has created management challenges for the county when it comes to noxious weeds, wildfire spreengs, and mitigation, and managing the challenges of the private checkerboard we see throughout the west.
it is for all these reasons but especially because of the local opposition that i urged my colleagues to remove the land in montezuma county from the bill during the legislative process. additionally, my colleagues' amendment to the underlying bill added additional land in montezuma for wilderness designation. i will note that the counties are also opposed to these lands being added as indicated in their opposition letter. this amendment focuses on land in montezuma county, i also want to say that the mesa county board of county commissioners has written to meent bill's sponsor about its opposition to the bill and the proposed wilderness additions in its county. there seems to be a common theme here. i encourage my colleagues to support my amendment. give the lack of local support -- given the lack of support this bill has in western colorado, this amendment is not enough to fix the flaws of the bill. therefore i encourage my colleagues who believe that local input is important in lay management decisions to be able
to oppose the underlying bill. thank you. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton, reserves. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. degette: thank you, mr. chairman. i have nothing but great affection and respect for my friend from the third congressional district, and i have worked with him and his predecessors as i developed this bill over the last 20-plus years. but i respectfully have to strongly disagree with him over his proposal to remove these two areas from the legislation. as a matter of fact, as i mentioned earlier in general debate, i actually went to these two areas over the august recess and i visited these areas. i invited mr. tipton to come, but he was unavailable. when we were in the cross canyon area we rode in on horses because there is no trails.
it's completely unacceptable. there we saw an sesstral pueblos, when we went to the weber area overlooking it, we saw clearly how this area was wild and needed protection. and by the way, the areas with the noxious weeds were several, several miles away not even close to the wilderness area. i do understand these concerns. i believe these two areas are a case study for who you should listen to when you decide what wilderness should be. as i said in general debate, when mr. -- when commissioner urtel came to testify before congress, he rightly said that i had never been to these two areas. so last august i went there. and i toured the areas. i had a town hall meeting in cortez, which is the town that's right in between these two areas. we had 65 people -- soarry, we
had over 70 people who showed up at this town hall meeting. and i presented what the bill was. several other people asked questions, presented opposing views. at the end, i just had a gut feeling that there was support there. so i took an impromptu survey and asked the people in that room how many of you, knowing what you know, would support designation of cross canyon and weber as wilderness? 65 people raised their hands. then i asked, how many of you would oppose it? and four people raised their hands. when i asked how many are neutral, four people raised their hands. so it seems to me we shouldn't be having local county commissioners have veto power either over the citizens in those areas or over the u.s. congress in determining wilderness. by the way, the local mayor of
cortez and the town council have all voted to support designation of these areas, both of which have been wilderness study areas for over 30 years permanently. that's why we need to keep these areas in our bill. that's why they need to be designated as wilderness because they are wild and pristine. that's why i humbly and respectfully ask for a no vote on this amendment and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of the time. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. tipton: thank you, mr. chairman. i am grateful that my colleague who i also have a lot of respect for, did come down to montezuma county. i hope while you were there you had the opportunity to spend a little money, buy a few presents to be able to take back and help an area that's often left out and forgotten in colorado. what you speak to is important. you mentioned that the city council, the mayor were
supporting. that's great. but they aren't responsible for the county lands which the county commissioners are responsible for. it was within the confines of the city limits. does that diminish their right to be able to have an opinion? it does not. ut it is not being a-- addressed is these are already protected lands. these are already protected lands. there isn't a person in the state of colorado or the country that can go on any of those lands and try to develop them, to try to be able to put in a road, to put in a tower for transmission. that would have to be able to go through a planning process, a comment process, if anything was to be able to happen. so those local comments, the impacts that our county commissioners are seeing, those are responsible for the land, should not be ignored. should be listened to. i would encourage the adoption of my amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from colorado is
recognized. ms. degette: the gentleman should be assured we spent quite a little bit of money in your town. i just want to say what the gentleman said points to exactly what i'm saying. he says that the cortez town council and mayor are not managing the county lands. guess what? the county commissioners aren't managing the federal lands. these are federal lands. these are wilderness study areas, and they have been wilderness study areas for almost 30 years. and the residents, the local residents, they are the ones that should care. they are the ones using these areas. they want them to be preserved. mr. chairman, i want to refer again on the wesh -- western slope in the areas in this bill new bridge strategy did a poll last october, october, 2019, they found that in those areas 71% of coloradoians -- coloradoans support wilderness protections for those already managed as such, like these two
areas, and 63% supported expanding wilderness protections across the state. these are the people who matter. these are the people who care. also, we have a list of 80 different groups. most of them on the western slope. 179 e have a list of business owners and community leaders, most of them on the western slope, who support this legislation. the reason is because the local governments, and the county governments, are benefiting from the visitors that they have to these areas. in cortez, one of the biggest employers is osprey, almost everybody has an osprey backpack or something in their home. they are selling their goods to the people who are using these areas. that's why i oppose this amendment. that's why we need to pass this bill and we need to protect these areas that are already wilderness study areas and have
been for 30 years. for the future generations to come. with that i urge a no vote and i yield back the balance of my time. unanimous consent to put the list of the business owners and the conservation and recreation groups, as well as the survey into the record. the chair: the gentlewoman's request will be covered by general leave. the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time of the the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado, so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. tipton: i request a recorded vote. the chair: friction, further proceedings on the amendment offered by -- pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton, will be postponed. it's now in order to considered amendment number 10 print in house report number 116-395. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. tip don: i have an amendment
at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in house report number 116-39 a 5, offered by mr. tipton of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 844, the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton, and a member posed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton. mr. tipton: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, military aviation and training is critical to the national security interests of the united states and readiness of our armed forces. my district is home to one of the installations that conducts military aviation training missions for men and women in uniform. the high altitude army national guard aviation training site located in gypsum, colorado. it is an honor and privilege to be able to represent the lone u.s. department of defense schoolhouse where rotary wing aviators in our nation's armed forces and our foreign allies learn how to be able to fly
safely. rotary wing aircraft in mountainous, high altitude environments. the safe training that is required by our service men and women in hats is vital to our national security and our readiness. mr. chairman, title 1 of the protecting america's wilderness act would establish five wilderness or potential wilderness areas within the hats training area. during this congress, numerous pieces of legislation designating wilderness continue to be introduced without taking into consideration the potential effects these designations would have on readiness. proactively congress should work to be able to ensure that current and future wilderness proposals do not interfere with readiness of our armed forces when it comes to aviation and training. mr. chairman, my amendment would require the secretary of defense to conduct a study which would examine the impacts of the expansion of wilderness designations in the western united states and what they would have on the readiness of our armed forces with respect to
the amb -- aviation training. i urge all my colleagues to be able to support this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from colorado reserves. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: mr. chairman, i'd like to claim time in opposition although i am not opposed to the amendment. the chair: without objection, the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. . debate one: there is how it will impact training in colorado and i have been concerned about this for some years. been looking at this for over 10 years ever since we high out about the altitude training by the national guard. we have provisions in underlying of course, we have accepted an amendment from mr. unningham that would clearly say, nothing in this bill will interfere with the hats activities. as a matter of fact, we removed several areas from the original
out had we found helicopter landing pads in them them potential wilderness because, frankly, i on't think that landing a helicopter in an area is an approved wilderness use. that all along. and so therefore, we want to make sure that the national continue to do its landing in these areas as long necessary that it's to do so. we have written the underlying bill that way. cunningham's amendment clarifies it, and frankly, if help mendment is -- will to clarify the situation even happy to go be along with that because i do not think any of on't the other bill's sponsors intend our national ith defense. people might be surprised to out the findings of the study when it comes because
offers the pentagon buffer that wilderness offers for aviation training. by , this bill is supported an a number of veterans and organizations. i will be submitting to the ecord a letter dated february 11, 2020, from the vet voice shows support for this legislation and in particular support for the in this legislation and, again, i'd ask unanimous consent to place this letter in record and with that i urge support mr. tipton's amendment and i yield back the balance of time. gentlewoman's request will be covered under general leave. yields back. the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. -- the gentleman from colorado recognized. mr. tipton: i thank ms. degette. yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. now in order to consider amendment number 11 printed in house report 116-395. the hat purpose does gentleman from washington seek recognition? r. kilmer: thank you, mr. speaker. i have an amendment at the desk made in order by the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. number 11 amendment printed in house report 116-395 of red by mr. kilmer washington. dho -- the chair: pursuant to house 844, the honorable entleman from washington, mr. kilmer, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes.
the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. you, mr. r: thank chairman. i am proud to introduce this amendment to make improvements 6 of this bill which designates 19 wild and scenic olympic peninsula of washington state. this will further protect the interest of washington state's resources of natural to manage state-owned lands adjacent to new wild and scenic designations. building on the savings clause already included in the base protects explicitly d.n.r.'s management authority, this amendment would further secretary of agriculture to enter into cooperative agreements with new wild and scenic river that abut d.n.r. lands. important change will make sure they not only retain state-owned lands but has a clear voice on how the surrounded lands that fall within the wild and scenic river corridor. this has led our state commissioner of public lands,
illary, to give her strong support to this bill. second, this amendment directs the secretary of agriculture to 19 lete the comprehelpsive -- comprehensive through agement land updating the forest management plan for the olympic national forest. it sets a maximum five-year time line for updating the plan and equires the secretary to request additional funds to complete it if needed. this provision will ensure this forest plan update which was last revised nearly not take des ago does a backseat to the development of these comprehensive river management justice plans. ensures that the secretary will have sufficient resources to complete the update manner.ely this amendment was developed through direct consultation with stakeholders and will ultimately strengthen title 6 of this bill. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington reserves. does the urpose gentleman from arkansas seek
recognition? mr. westerman: mr. chairman, i sk unanimous consent to claim time in opposition although i am not opposed to the amendment. he chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. westerman: mr. chairman, i thisn opportunity to visit beautiful part of the world where my colleague from represents. i know that he has the best nterest of that beautiful forest and beautiful natural areas. it's because of this and because this commonsense amendment that i can rise in support of it. although i do not believe it far enough to address some of the legitimate concerns itsed by local stakeholders, is a great step in the right direction. instead of simply removing wild and scenic designations from state trust lands that's managed by the ashington department of resources to generate revenues for schools, counties and other beneficiaries, the amendment directs the secretary of agriculture to work with the have cooperative management. to develop these cooperative
to give t agreements the management or too guide the toagement of those rivers -- uide the management of those rivers. now, these lands are subjected to additional process, i believe difficult e it more for d.n.r. to propose timber arvest in these areas that could cost school funding and other benefits. the savings language added in clarify dment can only what is required under federal law. nothing in the savings language d.n.r. from potential added burdens under washington state's environmental protection act, potential litigation based on the wild and scenic overlays, adjacent wilderness, or otential litigation based on the new designation. this amendment also appears to recognize the tremendous burden put on theation will olympic national forest. under the wild and scenic act, olympic will be required to prepare comprehensive river
management plans for 19 new wild scenic rivers across 464 miles of river, all of that three years. the amendment seeks to give the forest the potential for a but the extension, reality is the staff of this forest will be spendingeding the next several years doing paperwork instead of increase culverts, timber harvest. all of these things that have broad support. all the while, the olympic forest is still living under a forest plan that hasn't been revised since 1994 when the clinton northwest forest plan was adopted. most of the rivers proposed for wild and scenic designation were not found to be suitable by the forest service. currently, the state of washington -- in the state of 197 miles , there are of wild and scenic river. this legislation would more than quintuple the number of miles of river in washington. wish this amendment went further, i congratulate my
colleague and encourage him to working with stakeholders and i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this mendment, which does make the underlying bill better. time.hat i yield back my the chair: the gentleman from arkansas yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington, is recognized. mr. kilmer: thank you, mr. speaker. all, t want to, first of thank the gentleman for his support for this amendment. again, it makes two changes that strengthen the legislation, to ensure there's ot an impact on state d.n.r. harvest. hopefully to see the forest service move forward with an management e forest plan, which is a long time coming, a long overdue process move forward. that's why we're putting forward this amendment. strengthens the legislation. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of adopting it, and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. consider n order to amendment number 12 printed in house report 116-395. for what purpose does the washington seek recognition? ms. schrier: i have an amendment at the desk. under the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 12 in house report 116-395 offered by ms. schrier of washington. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 844, the gentlewoman from washington, ms. schrier, opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair now recognizes the entlewoman from washington state. ms. schrier: thank you, mr. chair. i yield myself such time as i consume. first, i'd like to applaud the colleagues, representative kilmer and representative degette for all
he hard work they have done on this underlying, very important bill. it's a great bill for washington, and i will be if.orting protecting wilderness areas is o important to maintain washington's beautiful environment for future generations. veryendment to the bill is simple. it requires the government accountability office to study preserving wilderness lands can help reduce flood risks in areas.tial this is practically in my backyard. ver the past week, washington state has experienced severe winter storms. the governor of washington state recently issued an emergency proclamation for 25 counties due flooding and winter weather. hree of those counties are located in the eighth congressional district, my congressional district. district, these storms largely took the form of excessive rain and flooding. landslides on a highway that cut off access to and reenwater community
crystal mountain, washington's for rea, which was closed our days in a typical busy weekend. here, the east side fire evacuated apartment buildings that were in proximity to a creek that had breached its and had water rushing through the parking lot and under the building. the town that has two roads in and out, there's a landslide underneath one of those roads and the road has started to separate. encouraged ve been to evacuate, so they are not at isk of being isolated in this town. as we continue to confront climate change, we need to olistically consider our approaches to wilderness and public lands. preservation of our public lands at our disposal to help mitigate the impacts of flooding. nature do what nature does best, soak up water and prevent land from moving and
landslide or mudslide during a flooding event. climate change science shows our region will experience heavier, more intense rainfall on snow ased rain events that will increase the risk for flooding. watershed level playing from the headwaters and wild and public lands all the and cities our towns is critical if we are going to address the myriad of challenges so many of our communities, from flooding to almon habitat restoration to expanding recreation and outdoor access. s we think on a watershed scale, wilderness areas in the eighth congressional district and across the state help headwaters of our watershe watersheds. downhill we her have collaborative groups working on active management to improve forest health. watersheds we have local governments, tribes, other stakeholders working on to reduce approaches flood risks in our communities.
as our climate changes, we will market increase in these 100-year events, whether that's snowstorms, wildfires, it can be managed with a thoughtful approach planning, use, protection. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. reserve the i balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserv her ves the balance of time. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? i -- ull-mr. chair, mr. fulcher: mr. chair, i ask to claim time in opposition though opposed. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fulcher: i rise in support of this amendment. a simple study. we don't know what the cost is, that and i want to use comment to correct myself previously. federal at the government's $2.3 trillion. there.ff by a decimal it's $23.3 trillion. supposed to be untrampled by man. or a man as a visitor does not
remain. is true that wildfires in wilderness areas definitely perhaps flood risk, and that point out an underlying law in the underlying bill, of course. that's there are wilderness areas too close to where are but, again, the study is ok. the amendment is ok. think just -- it does identify one of the 192 flaws in the bill which is wilderness too close to residential area and those 192, estimate.an, is an i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from washington is recognized. . ms. schrier: thank you. i appreciate the support of my colleague. he's absolutely right that wildfires do increase the risk of landslides and flooding later down the line and we forget about that part, what happens when the rain hits that previously scorched earth. i am thrilled to present this
amendment, to have a study to protect our city, urban areas, and in times of flood. and i appreciate the support from my colleague. i am prepared to close. the chair: the gentleman is recognized to close. the gentleman from idaho has yielded back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from washington is recognized. ms. schrier: thank you. i yield back. thank you. the chair: the gentlewoman from washington yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.
for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? ms. degette: i move that the committee now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. mr. chairman. the chair: madam speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union, having had under consideration h.r. 2546, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r.
book, false premise, false promise. >> just in december, there were over four million brits on a waiting list to get treatment. and the cancer treatment is not supposed to be delayed from seeing a general practitioner to getting treatment more than 62 days. they haven't met in the u.k. that standard for over five years. and more important, under the world health organization study, brits are the bottom of the wrung in most industrialized countries. >> watch afterwords sunday night at 9:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on c-span2. t
we have covering all things politics in the great state of illinois. > welcome. welcome to state solutions. we have a lot to cover. governor, thank you for being here. we're going to cover marijuana legalization, we're going to cover overhauling the state income tax. ome tax, and of coure we will not avoid put 2020 politics for so let's get started. so you're just marking your first year in office and i think you could check off all sorts of with liberal when that we have in the first year. codifying abortion rates in the state constitution, legalizing marijuana in the state and also raising the minimum wage,
something that has been going on in a most every state. so a lot of this was achievable because you came in and democrats have both in the state legislature and sodas having single potter party rule, does t make for good governance questioning. >> not always. let me be clear, the old will rogers line, i don't belong to an organized party, i'm a democrat. that is true in illinois also. just because we have a democratic house and a democratic senate and a democratic governor, that does not mean were always in agreement on everything. and we need leadership in the states, we have been somewhat directionless and the last two years under my predecessor there was really no compromise, no movement forward for the state.